Comments on: Is This Really a White Paper? You Decide…

By: Erika

Erika — Fri, 25 Jul 2008 05:20:25 +0000

This in particular, I don’t think is a white paper… however, that’s not to say that shorter lengths can’t be just as successful in conveying a purpose and achieving the intended goal. This particular one just wasn’t up to par, is all.

By: Owen

Owen — Mon, 21 Jul 2008 20:52:45 +0000

Right on Terri! I dropped by your web site and saw my favorite opera on the front page A.I.D.A. The only differentiation is that I use AIDA as a framework for whitepapers rather than to use the whitepaper only in the interest category.

Have any of you used reference urls to special client webpages in the body of your whitepapers to build the engagement process. It would be interesting to open FACs or a video to build the case and bring the premise to life. Just my brain running on OT;-) as I have yet to implement such a concept.

Owen

By: Terri Rylander

Terri Rylander — Mon, 21 Jul 2008 20:10:12 +0000

A white paper’s quality cannot be based solely on number of pages. A paper may have the typical number of pages, 8-12, but still not serve the true purpose of a white paper.

A white paper must educate and motivate the reader enough to take the next step. That next step may be to initiate a sales call or build a business case to present to the executives. The paper must clearly articulate the business problem, including any quantifiable data or statistics. Then the paper must guide and convince the user that this method, and ultimately vendor solution, is the proper answer to the problem.

As we’ve seen, this usually takes 8-12 pages to do. Hard to imagine only two pages – but maybe we should challenge ourselves to see how tight we really can write. This may become more and more important with shorter reading attention spans! Food for thought.

By: Goran Giertz

Goran Giertz — Mon, 21 Jul 2008 06:28:02 +0000

This document is more of a summary than a white paper. Very little education of the reader takes place here.

By: Natalie Brahan

Natalie Brahan — Sat, 19 Jul 2008 20:20:58 +0000

I agree; some customers doprefer short information but while others tend to prefer long one

By: Owen

Owen — Fri, 18 Jul 2008 19:40:04 +0000

I agree that one component of a white paper is to inform the reader, another is to get the readers attention, develop interest and desire to learn more which leads to the action phase that makes our clients smile. That is the “tell/show me more” when customers are induced to take action. Of course this doesnt hold true for government or educational submissions which include significantly more detail and typically more pages. I write for business and non-profit clients who are interested in engaging new existing and former customers, volunteers and donors. An interesting methodology is to write the interest stimulator paper as well as a follow on piece [or a series of follow on pieces] that require the reader to act and become engaged with our client.

As to length, isn’t it important to focus on the type of reader that the client is targeting. Some want it cut, dried and simple, while other readers want wikipedia length tomes and full details. I tend to write by focusing on what my audience wants to read.

Owen

By: Jonathan Kantor

Jonathan Kantor — Fri, 18 Jul 2008 18:23:35 +0000

Mike,

This is NOT white paper. A key part of a good white paper is its ability to educate the reader in detail about a particular topic. At some point we have to accept the fact that to do so requires the dedicate of a particular page length to this task.

The example that you have provided is an article with a front cover that is masquerading as a white paper. If this practice is acceptable, then ANYTHING can be called a white paper, which is what happens when you have a lack of standards in the marketplace.

Jonathan

By: Sean Romanoff

Sean Romanoff — Fri, 18 Jul 2008 17:42:22 +0000

Hi Mike - I chimed in on this subject when you raised it previously. Originally I said the same thing as Toby - that quality matters most. But after reading some of your posts, I deferred to your expertise and conceded that a short piece probably doesn’t offer enough valuable information.

The problem is that there are documents out there, like this one, that need a name. They are useful marketing tools and have a valid place in the market. Perhaps they’re a special report. Perhaps there’s another name (I don’t think it’s an article…if so, it’s a total snooze).

I’m less wedded to form as I am the depth. This document didn’t have enough detail in it, and what’s there isn’t presented in an interesting way. Failure to have those qualities is what kills it - and a longer document has a better chance to meet those standards.

By: Nicole

Nicole — Fri, 18 Jul 2008 00:56:44 +0000

I found the whitepaper/article quite technical. I wasn’t inspired to continue reading. However, if it had captured my interest and directed me to action, I don’t think I would doubt it’s a whitepaper. I would actually prefer that whitepapers were less lengthy.

By: Owen

Owen — Fri, 18 Jul 2008 00:44:51 +0000

My commentary focuses on writing for profit. Although the government and the universities focus on solution based papers that deliver answers. Corporations tend to focus on bottom line profit. With respect to white papers this means attracting new customers, retaining existing customers and reviving former customers by creating reasons to buy their products or services.

In my way of thinking, using the K.I.S.S. [keep it simple stupid] analogy, we should focus our content on what they like. That usually tends to be material that delivers results at the bank. If we deliver what clients want, they will more readily pay for the white papers that they perceive to be bottom line revenue generators. I agree with Mike that the sample content isn’t what I would consider to be a white paper but for different reasons.

Owen